Page 136 - DPOL202_COMPARATIVE_POLITICS_AND_GOVERNMENT_ENGLISH

Unit 6: Socio-Economic Bases and Salient Features of the Constitutions

3. Unitary System Notes
Like England, France affords another leading example of a unitary system. The country is
divided into territorial circumscriptions called ‘departments’ and these are subdivided into
cantons, arrondissements, and communes, each having its own organs for certain purposes of
local government, but the authority which they possess is very restricted; it is derived not from
the Constitution but from the acts of Parliament. As a matter of fact, these local organisations
are mere agents of the central government located at Paris and the exercise of powers left to
them is subject to its wide control. However, unlike the unitary system of Britain, the unitary
system of France is rooted both in history and sentiments of the people which justify that all
French political systems ‘always gravitate automatically and rapidly towards unity and
homogeneity of powers.’
It is owing to this fact that after the First World War a movement of Regionalism (a movement
that demanded the breaking up of the country into local units and giving them a real measure
of local autonomy in order to relieve the Central government of some of its multifarious
functions) could not gain success. Moreover, as a result of this, French unitary system is more
rigid and centralised than that of Great Britain. Hence, the Constitution of the Fifth Republic
retains the spirit of the earlier constitutions in this regard and indicates nothing more than the
intention to vitalise French local government and to secure greater co-ordination of functions
between the state departments and the units of local administration. Naturally the aspect of
centralisation in the unitary system of France “is more significant also because the French state
undertakes such a wide range of governmental activities”
4. Rule of ‘Incompatibility’
The way the de Gaulle Constitution has managed to keep the legislative and executive
departments apart and, at the same time, sought to establish the bond of conjunction between
the two is really an innovation. It has led to the establishment of a peculiar model of government
that may be termed both quasi-presidential and quasi-parliamentary, though the former
appellation would be more appropriate. It provides for a Cabinet under a Prime Minister
eventually led by the President whose members cannot be the members of the Parliament, but
who are accountable to it. That is, France has a Cabinet without, what the English people call,
a cabinet government.
Instances of the separation of the legislative from the executive organ can be found in various
arrangements. Though the President is the real executive head, he is not accountable to national
legislature; the Prime Minister and his ministers are responsible to the Parliament without
being members of either house. It is provided that as a legislator joins the government, he shall
forfeit his membership of the House that would be given to his ‘substitute.’ The legislature may
show its no-confidence in the Government as a result of which it shall resign. The Prime
Minister may himself table a resolution of confidence which, if not adopted, would amount to
the defeat of the Government and thereupon its resignation would take place.
5. Quasi-Presidential Government
As pointed out above, the French government under the present Constitution pertains more to
a quasi-presidential than to a quasi-parliamentary model in view of the fact that the authority
of the President is far more extensive than that of the Prime Minister. The President is not at all
a titutar head of the state like the English monarch, rather he has his prototype in his American
counterpart. Moreover in certain respects he is more powerful than the American head of the
state. He appoints his Prime Minister and other ministers on the advice of the Prime Minister.
He also administers to them the oaths of office and secrecy and accepts their resignations. He
presides over the cabinet meetings and thereby sees to it that the decisions of the government
are taken in accordance with his wishes. It all shows the traits of a presidential government. On
the contrary, the fact that not the President but the Prime Minister and his ministers are
responsible to the Parliament indicates the incorporation of a parliamentary system in the
French Constitution. The heavier point should, however, be traced in the position of the President
who is the real working head of the state and also of the government.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 131